[ECOS] Using config tool for other projects

[ECOS] Using config tool for other projects

[Geetha Manjunath]

Hello all,

The ecos config tool and its language seem to be  nice for configuring
any
fairly complex source code. Are there any instances of the config tool +

CDL being leveraged for projects other than ecos ?

Thanks and regards
Geetha

Re: [ECOS] Using config tool for other projects

[Julian Smart]

At 12:21 PM 7/6/01 +0530, you wrote:
>Hello all,
>
>The ecos config tool and its language seem to be  nice for configuring
>any
>fairly complex source code. Are there any instances of the config tool +
>
>CDL being leveraged for projects other than ecos ?

While a generic configuration tool is something we've thought would be very 
nice, time constraints have only allowed us to make it eCos-centric. 
However, in principle, there's nothing to stop one abstracting out a lot of 
functionality. It would be a somewhat time-consuming project but a 
worthwhile one. Anyone who wishes to attempt this will have my (at least 
moral) support :-)

Best regards,

Julian
--
Red Hat UK Ltd, Unit 200 Rustat House, 62 Clifton Road, Cambridge, UK. CB1 
7EG Tel: +44 (1223) 271063

Re: [ECOS] Using config tool for other projects

[Bart Veer]

>>>>> "Geetha" == Geetha Manjunath <geetham@india.hp.com> writes:

    Geetha> Hello all,
    Geetha> The ecos config tool and its language seem to be nice for
    Geetha> configuring any fairly complex source code. Are there any
    Geetha> instances of the config tool + CDL being leveraged for
    Geetha> projects other than ecos ?

There have been some instances where the CDL technology was considered
for other projects, but none of them got past the investigation and
prototype stage.

CDL is designed for a very specific componentized model of software
development. If the intended system is fundamentally monolithic in
nature, CDL will not be appropriate. If the intended system will be a
set of packages with dependencies, CDL may be appropriate. Also, the
eCos configuration technology is intended to allow users to manipulate
all the configuration options, unlike something like autoconf where
the intention is that the tool adapts to the environment with minimal
user intervention required. Hence CDL would not really be appropriate
as a technology for replacing autoconf, the underlying goals are
different.

There are some areas in the current technology where the code is
biassed specifically towards eCos. For example the makefile generation
code has built-in knowledge of the typical eCos development process.
Areas like that would have to be analysed and made more generic, if
you wanted to re-use the technology for different purposes. There are
also many areas where the current implementation of the CDL technology
is incomplete: barely sufficient for current eCos needs, but no more
than that.

If you have some specific project in mind for which CDL technology
might be appropriate, I would certainly be interested in finding out
more. 

Bart